Being my age (old) and "out of the loop" on HT for the past 10 -15 years, I had to do some significant research over the past 6-8 months before making a move to fill my newly finished basement with HT toys. The last music system I purchased only had two speaker outputs, and CD, AUX and PHONO inputs. All of my comments should therefore be considered of the newbie variety.

Unlike most of you, I am buying everything from scratch vs. upgrading, because essential, there is nothing to upgrade.

The company I work with is a major supplier to Denon so I took advantage of their offer to get the 5900 DVD player and 4802 AVR at a tremendous discount Note that I wasn't smart enough to know that the Denon Link can only be used between the 5900 and the larger 5802 AVR.

I tried to listen to as many speakers as possible, but nothing under $8K a pair sounded that great up here in NH, and my budget is in the $2-4K vicinity for a complete set.

I was fortunate to audition some Rockets at a nearby residence several months ago, and they immediately made my target list.

I have also been intrigued with the Axiom's based on the enthusiastic users online. Although I haven't heard them yet, I have decided to take advantage of the 30 day try out offer and test the Axiom M60's against the Rockets with my own gear in my own house. I figure this is really the only way to audition them. I got the idea of course from this board (thanks).

So everything arrived this week and now I am struggling to hook everything up. I am going to focus on the two mains first for 30 days, then worry about the surrounds, center and video later. Here are some initial impressions without actually listening to anything:

1. Denon's manuals absolutely suck
2. Both Onix & Axiom have the nicest and most knowledgable staffs that I have ever encountered. Both graciously accepted this challenge and neither tried to sway me with salespeak. Both were confident the music would do the talking.
3. Both speakers look fabulous. They are about the same size.
4. Clearly I am over my head in technology. The back of the 4802 has more inputs than the Mustang Ranch. Jumping from what I had to this is like Fred Flinstone stepping out of the brontosaurus-mobile into a Porsche. I have called for reinforcements. I hope to get everything hooked up before my thirty days are over.
5. Did I mention the Denon manuals suck?

I will try to keep you posted. I will be posting the same comments on the Onix (AV123) board.

I would like to thank all those on this board who have already graciously provided me with assistance.

First, I must clear something up. Spiff, I have ties older than you are. You are not old enough to have lived ANYWHERE for a long time.

Now, on to business. drmurray (may I call you dr?), I frankly don't care which speakers you get. At this point, the important thing is that you simply keep posting on the board!!! With some practice, you will overcome your natural reticence to express your self.

While I maybe one of the few who noticed that your moniker ends in "ray", which I feel as almost always a good thing, I was able to identify a kindred spirit. Old guy, twisted perspective, easily spends too much money without understanding what is being bought (VERY nice move on the Denon link thing!), a bunch of Denon equipment and easily confused by technology and (not that hard) manuals. If you also have a persistent rash that is resistant to penicillin and Drano, I'd suggest that we submit to a DNA test - there could be a gene commonality. Now, if you ALSO drool regularly and have less than 3 teeth, I'm guessing you will be privileged to see Ajax clamor to become another new best friend!

On a more serious note, it's nice to see you jump in with both feet. Doing the in-house thing is special. (BTW, the good news is that the speakers don't use Denon link) I expect that when you are done, the Axioms will have another new owner. Let me also throw in a plug for a new SVS sub before spiff shows up with his misguided HSU comments. (both are great and each have terrific staffs)

If the speaker smackdown ends in a draw, keep in mind that the Axiom line includes the QS8s. They are the unsung stars in the lineup. OK.... they ARE sung about alot, but it should be louder.

Just thinking out loud. The 4802 is a nice unit. The 5803A is a nice HUGE ( 2 pounds from qualifying for it's own zip code) and expensive unit. The 3805 was just introduced and is now shipping (it has Denon link). Do you have a chance to trade that 4802 (or sell it outright) and catch the 3805 with your discount discount? Worth considering.

As you say, keep us posted and good luck with the speaker wrestling match.

Oi! Enough of this! It's FUN to go off topic! Why is everyone complaining all the sudden? Lemme tell you, I wouldn't have stuck around for a year if all the talk was about which receiver to get and what the difference is between M22s and M60s...

Going OT isn't much trouble for us nuts that are on here all the time, but for someone who stops by once a day, or even only once per week, it can be a pain in the butt to wade through dozens, and dozens of OT posts to try and filter out the meat of a subject.

Now that I've just contributed to that...

Unless those Rocket RS750's sound nothing at all like their little brothers the RS250's, they're in for a sound trouncing by the M60ti's - price be damned.

I had a chance to audition the Rockets RS750's last weekend and Spiffnme is absoultely right about them; They have a different sound to them. I was looking for a sound like the Energy Veritas 2.3i and they don't sound anything like that. Alan told me that the Veritas 2.3i will be close to the M60ti; so the Rockets were not a good speaker for me to get. I wasn't too fond of the finish either. I would have to say it's fugly. It wouldn't blend in my decor in my bonus room. So I placed an order on Sunday for the M60ti. I hope I won't be returning these speakers.

I demo'd the Veritas 2.2 and the M60 in my home for about a week. They've very similar sounding. Detail, clarity, and soundstage go to the M60's. I like the resonance in the midrange of the Veritas better though.

Wow ! That was quite a flurry of activity. I can hardly keep up with you guys.

Trying to answer a few questions:
The Rockets I am comparing to are the 750's. Yes they are more expensive than the M60's. I initially intended to shoot for the M80's, but an experienced gentlemen at Axiom whose name escapes me (you guys may know who I am talking about) actually talked me out of them based on my setup. I was impressed with that. Of course, many may think I'm easily impressed. I don't know how to compensate/ explain the cost difference in my audition. On one hand the M60's have the price advantage; on the other the 750's should sound $600 better in theory.

Have any of you guys seen the back of one of these 4802's? Have any of you been to the Mustang Ranch? I give the MR a big thumbs up in "ease of use".

I might not be able to post stuff every night around here because:
A. I might not have time or
B. Nothing may have happened since the last time I posted,
so I hope no one is offended if I don't respond right away. I only have about 30 minutes a night during the week to fool around with this stuff.

I may have to pick your brains for advice soon. I'm so far lost however, that I don't even know what I don't know.

dr, you devil. A bit of advice. If you plan to apply the M60s to the same application you normally do at the Mustang Ranch, I don't belive you will be satisfied with the audio. On the other hand, if you plan to apply the same approch to 4802 as you deliver at the Mustang Ranch, then 1) that won't work either, 2) it's gonna hurt bad and 3) you are one twisted puppy.

I auditioned some Rocket RS150s against my Axiom 22tis. I chose those models because they were the same price. That's quite different from 750s vs. M60s of course, but I preferred the Axioms. IMHO, the Rockets lacked the "clarity" of the Axioms. Strangely I found them very similar in the highs, but I felt the Axioms were stronger in the midrange. Because of this I thought the Axioms had a superior "sound stage," and spacial quality.

DR, that "theory" has little or no application in audio; there's very little correlation between price and sound quality. My own M22s compare well with a highly-praised similarly-sized pair that cost about six times as much. I'd think that a similar situation applies in the case of the M60s.

I only have about 30 minutes a night during the week to fool around with this stuff.

After you get your Axioms hooked up, you WILL find more than 30 minutes a day to fool with this stuff. I guarantee you will be listening to music and watching movies for several hours each and every day. Food? Sleep? That stuff is for guys with inferior equipment!

Mark

_________________________
"Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff"

First of all, I have to come clean. I must admit that management has directed me to post here to make the rest of you guys look smarter. I wasn't supposed to admit this, but hey...isn't it obvious? You guys are no dummies. You can see through this...

Anyway...

Last night I achieved a major break through by actually hooking up a monitor via a Rube Goldberg type link thru a broken VCR using a coax in. Nobody told me you needed a monitor to set up these two Denon beasts! Geez...Here I am trying to figure out what the heck is going on and I can't see any of the menus.

Anyway, that was a big break through and now I have sound! That was quite an accomplishment. Luckily I had enough beer to last through the setup process. The monitor setup was huge because I found out that the default setting on the AVR is for multi-channel and all I want now is 2 channel. I am only focusing on the two speakers for 30 days and I will worry about subwoofers and projectors later.

A few questions for you guys:
1. Someone here brought up a great point- why not the M80's vs the 750's? I originally requested the M80's, but the Axiom salesman on the line suggested M60's. He said my reciever wasn't good enough for the M80's and too many flaws would be exposed in my electronics. So I ordered the M60's. On retrospect, this may not be a fair match.

Here's my setup:
I have a 850 sq foot open basement. I have a Denon 4802 AVR (which is next to their top of the line) and of course the Denon 5900 unniversal DVD player. The room will be a combo theater/ gameroom. I anticipate being able to watch a sporting event or listen to tunes while playing pool or foosball. I do have some issues with the placement of my speakers which I will discuss later. I am guessing about a 50/50% of music to movies, with a possible edge toward music.

What do you think of the M60's vs. the M80's for my sitaution?

2. Do the M60's need to be raised?
3. Is there a breakin period?
4. Does anybody on this thread have a 5900 DVD player? I have some questions specific to that.

Hmmm. That's odd. Who did you talk to at Axiom? Too many flaws will be exposed in the electronics? That's nonsense.

The M60s are easier to locate and move about (not as heavy), but assuming an 8-ft ceiling, you have 6,800 cu ft to fill. Actually, the M60s will be play very loud so you should be fine, but the aforementioned comments puzzle me.

I would have suggested the M80s for that enormous basement, particularly since you have the Denon 4802. Did the Axiom guy know that? All the Denons will drive M80s; likewise the H/Ks. They are the only brands of A/V receivers I recommend for the M80s (new NAD as well).

In answer to your other questions:

2. No.
3. Break-in is a myth. You are breaking in your brain and ears to a new set of reproducers in a new acoustical setting. The characteristics of the speaker do not change, even over years.
4. Don't know. Try the Denon site.

Doc... I can't answer your post unfortunately. But I am jealous of your system. I can say that the 4802 should be fine with the m80s, so I'm not entirely sure why you were directed to the m60s.

My foosball table is sitting in the enclosed porch at the moment, where it is a little too cold to get frequent use. My pool table is still sitting in the pool hall and I have to pay by the hour to play it...I guess in a sense it isn't really mine...

_________________________
[black]-"The further we go and older we grow, the more we know, the less we show."[/black]

The "Axiom guy"??? I'm glad Alan jumped on this piece. That is total BS - Denons are excellent. I would echo Alan's comments on the M80s. Ok if you want to spend the additional $300, but not required. The M60s will carry the load just fine. All you gain is some extra loudificationism and a small testosterone surge when you see the M80s. Given what you saved on the Denon stuff (you dog), go for the M80s. It won't hurt and you won't suffer from "what if".

Anyhow, get on over to the AVS forum and go to the DVD Player section. There is a huge 5900 thread over there started by "Levesque" that you should read. Set aside some time. This thing goes from intro to current and is incredibly detail specific. Since you HAD to get a 5900 (color me green with envy), you owe it to yourself to see this thread.

Also, I am glad to see you broke the code. A good HT experience always requires an adequate beer supply. Or Wine. Or Bourbon. Or (fill-in the blank).

I recently completed my 30 audition of Axiom M60ís vs. Onix Rocket 750ís (see above thread) and I would like to provide some feedback to the forums of both speakers. The process has been very educational. Keep in mind I am a low-tech guy who isnít very smart. Also keep in mind that all my equipment and my room are new, so there are a lot a variables to consider. The only sure thing is that the Denon manuals suck. I have had to spend nights and weekends on AVSforum.com to learn how to work my 5900 DVD player. One conclusion I have come to early on is that when you know how to set it up it tends to work a lot better.

The customer service at both companies is top notch. Very impressive. Not pushy. I will gladly continue to do business with the company I end up selecting.

I spent a lot of the 30-day review period trying to ensure that I had my DVD/receiver hooked up properly to optimize the audition. I believe I finally achieved that (with a lot of help). Ultimately I was listening to two-channel stereo via the analog inputs from the DVD player. I expect to have a 60/40 music to HT ratio, and I assumed that if the stereo sounds good, the HT would follow.

First a note about the finish/appearance. I have seen some mildly derogatory comments about the Axiomís vinyl finish, but frankly I thought they looked excellent. (I had Boston Cherry) In fact, I actually preferred the design of the M60ís. When you factor in the finish, I consider appearances a wash. By the way, my wife preferred the Rockets, and that was her only contribution to the exercise other than ďturn it downĒ.

Over the past 8 months I have read many reviews of speakers and many seemed to use the same universe of terminology or expressions, which sometimes leave me wondering how the comments actually relate to the sound. Therefore I am going to try to explain what I heard in my own words, clumsy as they may be.

I found it interesting that the Onix site insists that the speakers require a ďbreak in periodí and the Axiom site believes this is a total myth. Either way, both sets were adequately broken in before I made any decisions. I canít say whether the break in period was material because I really didnít listen to them until afterward.

Most of my comparisons were done with music I listen to frequently, such as the Stones, Bruce, Santana, Pink Floyd, Bowie, UB40, Bob Marley, Johnny Clegg, and a host of blues, world beat and reggae artists. I sprinkled in some excellent acoustic jazz guitar, some traditional jazz and a few classical tunes. The 5900 is a universal CD/DVD player, so I tried out the small collection of SACDís and DVD-Audio disks for grins.

One thing I noticed immediately is how lousy some of the CDís I own sound. My new system really highlights the lowlights where applicable. Iíve seen it stated many times and proved it with my own ears that the sound is only as good as the source signal.

In general, both speakers sounded great to me. There were only (to my ears) subtle differences between them, and the differences varied from song to song. Having said that, here are the ďconsĒ of both speakers:

The 750ís seemed to need to be cranked higher to fully appreciate their great sound. I donít know how to better explain it, but although they sounded fine at low volumes, it just wasnít as good as it sounded at louder volumes. This is not a huge issue as the system is in the basement with a dedicated HT setup, but would probably be a major problem if they were in a family room. The M60ís didnít have the same issue.

The M60ís tweeter was more pronounced, which normally for me was OK, but on a few songs sounded a bit harsh on things like snare drumbeats. Also, in general, the bass was more blurred, with more of a rumble compared to the more accurate bass notes of the 750ís. More importantly, there were a select few songs where the backup singers were very difficult to hear. Finally, and the most telling, was during the piano solo for ďGreat Gig in the SkyĒ on Dark Side of the Moon. The 750ís sounded excellent, but the piano sounded like it was down the hall and in a closet on the M60ís. Generally speaking, it sounded like the 750ís put you in the first row, and the M60ís were in row 25.

Again, these were all my untrained opinions. The differences were in reality to me very subtle.

If I hadnít compared the two speakers and instead listened to either one on their own, I would have definitely been happy with either one. But since I cannot afford to keep excess speakers hanging around, I decided to keep the 750ís. Other than what I have already stated, I just liked the sounds of the Rockets a little more, and some of the reasoning canít be quantified. This is strictly my opinion, and I could fully understand anyone who thought differently.

I am very pleased with the decision. After a significant amount of assessment (and much advice from Sean @ 123) I ordered the 200 center channel, the 250ís for rears, the 750 risers and a bunch of cables, all of which I am waiting to receive.

There were a few posters who commented that this comparison wasnít fair from the outset because of the drastic difference in price between the two. In hindsight, there may be some validity in that statement. The 750ís were almost double the price of the M60ís. I should have probably auditioned the M80ís.

I think the entire process was worthwhile, although I severely misjudged the cost of returning the speakers that I didnít choose. It cost me a cool $154 to return them. I would caution others to keep that in mind.

All in all, these were two great speakers, and you canít go wrong with either one. Both are bargains, but at $800/pair, the M60ís are a really awesome value. I will continue to recommend them to anyone who seeks my opinion. (although so far, the line at my front door is pretty short)

I am posting the same message to both sites. I would like to thank everyone from Axiom & AV123 and everyone on this site for helping me out. Iím sure I will have more questions going forward.

I would like to leave everyone with the immortal words of Maria Muldaur, who said, ďIt Ainít the Meat, Itís the MotionĒ, which of course has nothing to do with anything I just typed.

Excellent review. I have a pair of M60's and had to throw on my Dark Side of the Moon CD to see if I got the same effect. Didn't seem so to me but I can't do a side by side comparison with the Rockets. When I upgraded to M60's from my Abstract Acoustics the first thing a noticed was the tightness of the bass on the M60's - they didn't sound boomy at all.

The Denon actually might have trouble running those M80's at sustained high volume . The Denon is only rated stable to 6 ohms .

I had this problem with my Thiels over heating a Denon 5800 (Which supposedly could play satble down to 3.2 ohms tlb) and switched to Sunfires stereo amp which has been trouble free.

Also ... As a firm believer in break-in and the proud owner of M22's and M3's .... I test all speakers before and after and IMO they both definately benefitted from a wee bit of break in.

Definately not as much as some others , but benefit none the less.

At first the M22's where a tiny bit harsh and thin on the bottom end . So I took some notes on songs and played them for a few days with out listening ... then went back to them and the rough spots were gone and the bottom end seemed more natural and slightly fuller.

The M3's were identical in the highs as the M22's , but much weaker in the midrange and the bottom end although present was a tad compressed as I noticed the decays in certain instruments seemed too quick. I played these for a few days as well ... not listening to them and returned to the same music and voilŗ! The evened out beautifully.

The M22's in particular produce a wonderful clean clear soundstage and the mids and highs are fabulous. NOTHING like the way Drmurray described the M60's.

The difference before and after break-in is very subtle on these IMO but there none the less. I know I am disagreeing with the resident expert here ... but this is a theory I've tested over and over in speakers having owned more brands then I can remember.

To be sure these do not require heavy break-in like some speakers I've had. As an example ... My Sunfire Signature Subs (2 of them) required many many hours of break-in (Real pounding actually)... I would say easily 200 hours to fully loosen up those beasts of stiff surrounds. The difference was measurable in absolute output at various frequencies.

I argued this over at AVS ... one reviewer there tested this theory on output of the subs tested ... his findings agreed with mine and he found that indeed the output level produced a measurable change on 2 of 3 subs tested before and after break-in. 2 VERY popular subs ... mentioned in this thread.

Anyway ... I personally think the M80's would have been a better match , if for no other reason than the mismatch of driver configuration . The 750's use 4 5.25" drivers which is going to tip up the mid range much like the M22's do which produces a wonderful soundstage and fantastic detail.

I'm guessing the 60's much like the M3's may be tipped up slightly in bass where as the double mids and tweets on the 80's would have given him the detail he was looking for. That's what happens though when you compare apples to oranges.

Knowing the Vifa tweeter quite well ... I'm wondering how much he'll like it in a few months . Personally I feel it's one of the few tweeters that sounds better newer than after many months when to my ears they get flat (Or as some put it "They smooth out")

The Axiom tweeters I like a LOT.

As a musician for many many years I can say for a fact that Live is sometimes harsh or brite ... this is a fact ... Accurate reproduction will also sometimes be harsh or bright . I don't expect a speaker to smooth this out ... if it does it's taking something away that should be there. Accuracy means that SOME recordings won't sound that great because THEY WERE NOT.

I got my M80's, VP150 and QS8's on Monday and one thing I noticed was that the M80's are EXTREMELY sensitive to positioning. I could vastly change the soundstage just by toeing in the speakers just a few degrees or by separating the speakers a few more inches. I had a friend over last night who sat in the "prime spot" and told me "better or worse" as I moved the M80's around. Seems like the M80's and probably the M60's, in my home theater area anyway, like to be spread almost as far apart as the distance from them to the seating area and like to be toed in about 15degrees or so.

I heard differences in songe with width and depth of soundstage just by positioning and soundstage. I didn't try increasing the distance from the M80's to the back wall to see if that would make a difference. Additionally, I have an SVS 20-39PCi almost right next to each of the M80's (on the outside).

I don't know if this is typical that positioning would affect the soundstage of speakers this much or if the Rockets just aren't as sensitive. I would suggest, however, that people who try out the Axioms, especially the M60/M80 floorstanders, play with positioning A LOT to get the soundstage that these speakers are portrayed as having.

I've just listened to 2 channel music the past few days - but I just got my QS8's mounted so I'll update on how movies sound. My previous surround setup, to be frank, was terrible. (I was using Infinity powered bookshelf speakers on stands even with the listening position - so my surrounds were direct radiators at ear level which was FAR from optimal) I listened to the first 30 seconds of Matrix: Revolutions last night and was amazed at the envelopment provided by the QS8's. I'll be doing more critical HT listening in the next few days.

I think that is typical of towers with many drivers ... in my experience anyway with a few exceptions. This I think is due to tactile pressure and the wall of sound that you get from the large speakers and multiple drivers . (That would be my guess anyway)

That's one of the reasons I like bookshelves and good quality stands.

The M22's and M3's were very easy to set up and the soundstage is fantastic. The sound surrounds the speakers very nicely setting players up in space and producing nice depth.

Adding a sub into the mix creates even great space in the soundstage ... truly phenominal.

The Denon actually might have trouble running those M80's at sustained high volume . The Denon is only rated stable to 6 ohms

The rating is moot.
The Denons have been tried and true with the M80s for quite some time now which is why Axiom recommends them (along with H/K).
You cannot compare what the Thiels may do to a receiver against the M80s. They are not the same speaker regardless of the listed average ohm rating.

In reply to:

As a firm believer in break-in and the proud owner of M22's and M3's .... I test all speakers before and after and IMO they both definately benefitted from a wee bit of break in.

Like so many others have gone before you, they all conclude that speakers break-in without having accounted for the largest variable in the listening test...their own mental preconceptions.
You cannot control this consciously.
That is why Axiom uses blind tests for such experiments and have concluded the following.These are not casual listening tests but are experimental results from a controlled setting. The general theory on break-in is fundamentally flawed as the experimental process for concluding the results as fact did not cover a major influencing variable.
A submitted paper for publication with such an experimental design would get tossed into the "completely unacceptable" pile. Return to writer with suggestions on redoing the experiment.

_________________________"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

Petre,
This is not an argument, this is fact. This is the reality of how science proves what is real and what is just perceived as real.

I never doubt that you believe what you heard. No one ever wants to think that what they immediately see or hear is wrong, but our brains are easily fooled and easily biased by things as simple as how you felt that day, or what colours you have on your walls, etc. etc. What i question is that you even know what bias your mind had before coming to a conclusion regarding the phenomena you report. The mere statement that you made regarding playing the speakers, w/o llistening to them, in order to break them in says that you were expecting already to hear a difference following a break in period. Once the perception of a speaker requiring break-in has been planted, you will always believe that all speakers need break-in. This is the very nature of human thought and experience, but it doesn't mean it is a fact.

If you have some measured difference, by all means, share the data with us. Tell us how you measured, what you measured, where was it done, what were the controls, what were the variables.
I have yet to come across a single published paper that has valid scientific proof of speaker break-in related to perceivable and human heard observations but if you have proof, let it be evaluated by your peers.

I always find it so amazing how so many ppl can conclude the speaker is the source for the cause of changes in sound with break-in and yet bringing them another possibility, that it is their own auditory response to new sound which makes a temporal difference, they just cannot accept it.

_________________________"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

You are tireless, Chess. I must compliment you, as well, on your improved tact.
Not like I am the master of tact, my people skills are pretty poor.

Petre, I think what you said makes sense, but most here (myself included) will agree w/ the viewpoint Chess presented. I think the clincher for me was the query, "If speakers break-in due to physical changes in materials, what then causes the driver materials to suddenly stop physically changing?" IOW, whatever factors that would cause changes in the physical properties of a speaker would still be present after the break-in period, right? The result would be a continuing of the break-in period, the speaker materials continuing to change over time.

Having never heard the Rockets, I cannot comment on the comparison. But, from EVERYTHING I've read here, the AVS forum, et al, the Rockets aren't supposed to have that "front row" sound.
I am certainly curious to hear those 750s now. I wonder what return shipping to China is on those beasts?

Yeah, I believe they make them and import them from there. If you don't like them I think that's where you have to ship them back to, but I could be wrong.
And, BTW, no hard feelings on my end. Life's too short to be all pissed off all the time.

If speakers never changed ... why do drivers go bad after many years of play.

In another thread on a different forum I was in this same type of impassable discussion ... someone presented your arguement and a Physicist stepped in and explained it perfectly with facts that none of us could honestly understand .

Actually no.
I'm am talking about SCIENTIFICALLY PUBLISHED JOURNAL PAPERS on the limits of human hearing and psychoacoustic testing.
This is not just "my" opinion.
That IS real world fact. I know it appears hard for you to understand though because it contradicts your personal beliefs on the subject, but believe it or not, human ears are no where near as good as most people think they are.

In reply to:

Others have measured the changes... Myself included.

Once again, you state something and yet provide no proof.
Send me the title of a science, peer reviewed journal article on the subject.
No, Stereophile and other magazines are not valid sources of information.

In reply to:

I'm not some novice and these Axioms are not my first set of speakers.
I've been an Audiophile and musician for some 30 years.

Both these points are irrelevant. Scientific experiments to do not care whether a person is a self professed audiophile or not. As long as a random selection of subjects for testing is taken, many variables about individual characteristics can be assumed as spread equally across a distribution curve.

_________________________"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

I told Craigsub about this ..... He was able to measure the difference in his sub shoot out.

2 of the 3 subs had a measured change.

Science always wants to prove they know more. It doesn't matter how they prove ... just that they prove their opinion.

As I said before A physicist on the AVS forum stepped into another one of these discussions and shot all the theories about miraculous unchanging materials used in speakers and no breakin from manufacture , all to hell . But what does he know too . He pointed to scientific facts about the properties of ALL materials and stated proof of the reasons for change . He noted as well that changes are subtle for new materials and then stay in a state of seeming stability then eventually failure speaking in microcellular terms that no one understood . He even shot a supposed engineers theories to hell.

You say there's a paper or two that says otherwise ... right ? And if it's in black and white it must be so ... forget what you hear.

I say it's ridiculous to believe that right off the assembly line there is no change from hours of run in.

If speakers never changed ... why do drivers go bad after many years of play.

Petre, this goes EXACTLY towards what Bigwill just pointed out.
If speakers breakin, why don't they continue to break down?
You just agreed that they do.
So, in reality then, speakers will ALWAYS have a constantly changing sound as the components break down over time, by your definition.
By that standard, every other year? month? the speakers should have a whole new character sound again.

This brings me to the second point. Within these forums we've had ppl come and say things like, "my Axiom M60s needed xx hours of breakin and then they sounded good".
Replace xx with 10, 25 and 100.
How is it that the SAME speaker design and drivers all require different breakin periods? They made with all the same components yet there is a MAGNITUDE difference in the reported 'breakin' times.
Why are ppl not coming up with all the same conclusions on breakin?
No physicist can explain such a phenonmena. A behavioural scientist can.

I've heard lots of 'professionals' state how electronics/speakers will have this component or that component and on the white papers, you can make the numbers look different. The question remains, is it audible to the human ear?
Well, to determine an answer, a bunch of ppl stand around a setup and listen, but the casual listening tests are biased due to the nature of the human mind, and information from such auditions are useless. Any objective and honest scientist would know this.
Double blind testing is the only method by which you can remove alot of that bias, but hey, i guess it is too much to ask for from all these "audiophiles" to determine truth. Heaven forbid it would crush so many myths that the magical audio world will collapse upon them.

_________________________"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

Silly Petre for thinking that Chess's opinions are mere opinions rather than FACTS. Chess will tell you, Petre, you don't understand because it's hard for you to understand. Chess tells you that you have difficulty comprehending and that you shouldn't trust your ears when it comes to evaluating audio equipment. But ... how then can we say that we trust our ears when we say we really enjoy our Axiom speakers? No, Petre, don't trust your ears. Trust Chess's announcement of SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS - much more powerful than the mere opinions of other and lesser folks who find it difficult to understand.

Trust your ears. Enjoy the music.

_________________________

_________________________
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.

Petre, the only name calling I witnessed just now was your "Cheesbro" comments.
My ears tell me my Axiom M60s haven't changed a bit from day one.
Seems pretty cut and dried to me, but whatever.
Why can't people disagree, debate, refute, etc... without getting upset? Not to seem "holier-than-thou", just sincerely wondering.

The Cheesbro was an honest to goodness mistake that I did not even know was there until you pointed it out. I did not intentionally change his name and my apologies for doing so.

Then Petre, i apologize for my remarks but Bigwill has it correct. I certainly viewed your misrepresentation of my username as the start of name calling. It is rather hard to mistake chesseroo for cheesbro. I certainly never mistook Petre for Perturbed, or Puerile or other P words.
I never had any intention of calling you names, although i might add, that the label for 2x6spds has been uttered by others in the past and it continues to be well suited as he proves time and time again.

I simply asked for proof (proof beyond a general subjective opinion which to date, no one has been able to supply) and instead i got a runaround back to the starting point again. Why are doing blind tests so feared by people being critical of audio components?
It is a test that actually uses the human ears for results, BUT in a controlled, unbiased setting. I actually find it a fascinating thing to try and setup such an experiment in home when i get the chance to audition some equipment. Maybe others just don't want to bother.

_________________________"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

Why can't speakers be like hats or a pair of jeans? When you first buy a hat it is stiff and unmanagable, after days of wearing and messing with the bill, it takes it shape and more or less stays that way for the rest of the hat's life. It might continually become more flexible over the years (or degrade) but it will be at a very decreasing rate. The materials in a speaker driver and hat are obviously different (and thus possible irrelevant) but the principles don't neccessarily have to be.

Chess, I completely agree with you. It's frightening how little the general population knows about science and how it works. The fact is, no matter how much anecdotal or personal evidence you have in support of audio phenomenon X (be it break-in, differences btw. cables, SS amplifiers sounding different, etc.), you cannot trust it until it's been tested in a controlled environment. This is a basic tenet of science. Even scientists have personal biases. This is precisely why double-blind tests are so often used.

Now, cheese-toast (please forgive me ), being the most vocal (and likely the most qualified -- especially after sushi's departure) representative of the scientific community on this board, your responsibility is greater than you might imagine. To many here, you are the only real-world scientist they've ever had a conversation with. That role comes with a great burden, of which I'm sure you're aware.

Stomping all over someone's current belief system is no way to show them the error of their ways. I admire you for holding the torch of logic, methodology, and reason, but try to keep it held high. It's very tempting to swing it around and fling embers about, but burned people hold grudges.

Edited by pmbuko (04/24/0411:48 PM)

_________________________
"I wish I had documented moreÖ" said nobody on their death bed, ever.

Post by Cheeseroo .... "I actually find it a fascinating thing to try and setup such an experiment in home when i get the chance to audition some equipment. Maybe others just don't want to bother. "
--------------------------------------------------

Cheeseroo .... I would love to take that challenge.

Especially if I could pick the speakers. I guarantee if you have moderatly good ears , you'd hear before and after difference in controlled conditions.

I've owned all kinds of gear over the years and some speakers break in much more than others IMO.

VIFA's IMO have a very noticable "improvement"

B&W's FST mids definately breakin. (Just too stiff out of the box)

Most all subs loosen up after some good pounding. Especially ones with the heavy "foam" surrounds.

Like other theories I've tested this over the years and come to the conclusions I have rather than guess about it. I also tested high end speaker cables over regular 12 ga stranded and even SOLID wire .... I'll bet no one can tell the difference in a blind test. (Yet their are many scientific papers on why they sound better )

Anyway ... again ... My apologies . It was an honest to goodness mistake on your name.

In the end ... I'm just another music lover with far too much gear. In that regard I think many of us here are kindred spirits.